EVR1001L_Fall_2023_Lab_4_(1)

docx

School

Florida State University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1001

Subject

Biology

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by MagistrateScienceRaccoon39

EVR1001L Fall 2023 Lab 4 Invasive Species Tori Dexter October 16, 2023 Material & Methods The purpose of this study was based around the density of the invasive species, Lionfish, in its unnatural environment. The study is conducted in Kownlton Marine Research Station off the east coast of Florida. An invasive species, is a species that is not native to the area, and can be detrimental to the native species. The information needed for the experiment was collected a total of four times over the span of 18 months (month 0, month 6, month 12, and month 18). The ability to study this information and retrieve over a quick period time was due to the usage of a time machine. Each time data was collected, it was over a 25 meter by 10 meter area, being a total of 250 square meters. To be able to conduct this experiment, scuba gear was an absolute necessity; in this equipment it contained an air tank, as well as flippers. The methods used to retrieve the amount of native fish in the area being: Hogfish, Nassau Grouper, and Redband Parrotfish was the line transact; which was 25m x 10m . When performing the line transact, it provided the opportunity to swim directly through the area where the study was being conducted. Then to study the among of Lionfish in the area, the method of the S-Transact 25m x 10m . When this was being performed, it required to swim through the area in the shape of an S while

taking note of each Lionfish seen. Lastly, each time that data was collected six quadrant studies were conducted; the purpose was to see the impact that the presence of the Lionfish had on the environment, being the percentage of algae cover, coral cover, and any other subrate in each area. To do this, the data was taken every five meters with 6 different quadrants. Each quadrant was . 5m x .5m The average amount of algae cover percentage was taken by adding all five of the findings together, then dividing them by five (this is how the average was found for coral and other substrates as well). To reiterate, each of the three surveys were conducted a total of four times on month zero, month 6, month 12, and month 18.

Results: Tables & Graphs Table 1: Findings for Fish Survey & Density Data, as Well Algae, Coral, & Other Substrate Covers Every 6 Months After Lionfish Removal Fish Density & Area of Transect For the Lionfish’s density at: ● Start o 25 (fish counted)/250 m^2= .1

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

● 6 Months o 9(fish counted)/250 m^2= .036 ● 12 Months o 2(fish counted)/250 m^2= ● 18 Months o 0(fish counted)/250 m^2= 0 For each time frame that data was collected, I divided the amount of fish that I counted for that section and divided it by the area that the transect traveled through; which in every case was 250 meters squared. That being said, only for when the Lionfish were being counted was it performed in an “S” shape. For the Nassau Grouper’s density at: ● Start o 4(fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.016 ● 6 Months o 6(fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.024 ● 12 Months o 9(fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.036

● 18 Months o 11(fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.44 Similar to the Lionfish this shows the density for each time frame where data was collected. To do so, the amount of fish counted was divided by 250 meters squared. Unlike the Lionfish, a line transept was used instead of the “S” shape. For the Spanish Hogfish’s density at: ● Start o 4 (fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.016 ● 6 months o 7 (fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.028 ● 12 Months o 8 (fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.032 ● 18 Months o 20(fish counted)/250 m^2= 0..08 Similar to the Lionfish this shows the density for each time frame where data was collected. To do so, the amount of fish counted was divided by 250 meters squared. Unlike the Lionfish, a line transept was used instead of the “S” shape.

For the Red band Parrotfish’s density at: ● Start o 1(fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.004 ● 6 months o 2 (fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.008 ● 12 Months o 5 (fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.02 ● 18 Months o 10 (fish counted)/250 m^2= 0.04 Similar to the Lionfish this shows the density for each time frame where data was collected. To do so, the amount of fish counted was divided by 250 meters squared. Unlike the Lionfish, a line transept was used instead of the “S” shape. Figure 1.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 Change in Density Over 6 Month Incremements Lionfish Nassau Grouper Spanish Hogfish Redband Parrotfish Time (Months) Density Per Meter^2 Caption: Density of lionfish, and others other time as the presence of lionfish diminishes Figure 2. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Change in Coverage Over 6 Month Periods Algae % Coral % Other % Time (Months) Percentage of Cover Caption: shows the percentage change of coral, algae and other substrates

over 6 month increments after the lionfish population has diminished Discussion & Conclusion Like most invasive species, the presence of Lionfish was very detrimental to most members in this ecosystem. It was made clear that the presence of the Lionfish had a direct correlation to the coral, and prey fish in the environment. This relationship was inverse in regards to the prey fish, and the coral to the lionfish. In month zero, before the Lionfish (25 counted) were taken out and their populations were higher the Nassau Grouper (4 counted), Redband Parrotfish (1 counted), Spanish Hogfish’s (4 counted) numbers were all significantly lower. This can be due to a variety of other factors, but it should be fair to say, that the elimination of this invasive species definitely contributed significantly. The coral coverage was also significantly lower with the presence of the Lionfish. Between month zero and the first six month mark, the coral coverage increased nearly 20%. Compared to the algae and other substrate coverage’s; which didn’t experience that drastic of a change in the first 6 months. To continue, if the numbers of fish counted were initially lower, then it is not shocking that the density of these prey specifies were much lower as well. This is due to the fact, that the area the study was conducted at didn’t change, it stayed at 250 square meters, but the numbers of fish fluctuated. In the case of lion fish, the density decreased, but for the prey fish it increased. As a reminder, the equation used to come to the conclusions is the following: fish counted/ 250 m^2. Not only did the prey fish species benefit by the lionfish being taken out of the ecosystem, but the coral did as well. In the baseline study, the percentage of coral cover was significantly lower, because the presence of Lionfish is very hard on the structure of the coral. That being said, with the lack of Lionfish, it enabled the coral to grow and heal, which led to a massive increase

in coral cover. On the other hand, the algae coverage made a significant decline. This is most likely due to the fact that the prey fish eat algae, and initially when fewer of them were present, it presented the Algae the opportunity to over grow. Over time, as the prey fish populations began to heal, and repopulate the algae did the opposite, and its levels were depleted quickly. Once the experiment ended, I learned the significant impact that an invasive species has on every aspect of an ecosystem. It was clear that the lionfish were the prominent organism in the area at month zero, due to the poor state of the native organisms, but after the removal, and eventual end of the eighteen months each organism made an incredible recovery. In conclusion, this experiment illustrated exactly how directly inverse the relationship between a invasive species to a native species.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Related Documents

Bio 182 Lab report.docx

Lesson Plan (1).docx

Danielle Clements- Tree Thinking - Tagged.pdf

MEGA Tetrapods-Danielle Clements - Tagged.pdf

Danielle Clements- Ecological Modeling.pdf

Dichotomous Key Cells & Viruses- Post Lab questions and photos.docx

Lab 13. DNA Biology and Technology.docx

BIOL 1108L Field Survey Make Up Assignment 2.docx

E11 Lab Report-Aastha Ramolia.docx

Analysis & Visualization Project (written).docx

Lab5Assignment_BIO120F2023.docx

Lab 2 Manual.docx

Recommended textbooks for you

Biology: The Dynamic Science (MindTap Course List)

Biology

ISBN:9781305389892

Author:Peter J. Russell, Paul E. Hertz, Beverly McMillan

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Aquaculture Science

Biology

ISBN:9781133558347

Author:Parker

Publisher:Cengage

Biology: The Unity and Diversity of Life (MindTap...

Biology

ISBN:9781305073951

Author:Cecie Starr, Ralph Taggart, Christine Evers, Lisa Starr

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Biology 2e

Biology

ISBN:9781947172517

Author:Matthew Douglas, Jung Choi, Mary Ann Clark

Publisher:OpenStax

Case Studies In Health Information Management

Biology

ISBN:9781337676908

Author:SCHNERING

Publisher:Cengage

BIOLOGY:CONCEPTS+APPL.(LOOSELEAF)

Biology

ISBN:9781305967359

Author:STARR

Publisher:CENGAGE L

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS

Recommended textbooks for you

Biology: The Dynamic Science (MindTap Course List)
Biology
ISBN:9781305389892
Author:Peter J. Russell, Paul E. Hertz, Beverly McMillan
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Aquaculture Science
Biology
ISBN:9781133558347
Author:Parker
Publisher:Cengage
Biology: The Unity and Diversity of Life (MindTap...
Biology
ISBN:9781305073951
Author:Cecie Starr, Ralph Taggart, Christine Evers, Lisa Starr
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Biology 2e
Biology
ISBN:9781947172517
Author:Matthew Douglas, Jung Choi, Mary Ann Clark
Publisher:OpenStax
Case Studies In Health Information Management
Biology
ISBN:9781337676908
Author:SCHNERING
Publisher:Cengage
BIOLOGY:CONCEPTS+APPL.(LOOSELEAF)
Biology
ISBN:9781305967359
Author:STARR
Publisher:CENGAGE L